Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8896 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-23-2019 10:57 AM
37 online now:
PaulK, Percy (Admin), Tangle (3 members, 34 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,580 Year: 3,617/19,786 Month: 612/1,087 Week: 202/212 Day: 17/27 Hour: 1/4

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Answers Research Journal (new creation research journal)
Member (Idle past 3548 days)
Posts: 318
Joined: 06-08-2007

Message 16 of 17 (456205)
02-16-2008 9:54 AM

Whenever an opening thesis includes the phrase "..within a Biblical framework," this is immediately telling the audience the game is rigged -- the investigators have no intention of letting the chips fall where they may. In all of these journals, cutting edge research consists of nothing but looking for inconsistencies in an established theory and presenting that as 'evidence' to support any claims one wishes to make regarding Creationism.

It is surprising, then, when this camp collectively soils their pants because the academic community does not believe this type of 'research' actually belongs in a standard science curriculum. If they would abandon this approach and actually use evidence to objectively evaluate their hypothesis put forth instead of using an attempt to dismantle evolution as proof of their theory, the academic community would have no problem allowing such a theory in the classroom, should the evidence show such a hypothesis is viable.

Unfortunately, when asked to display any evidence that supports the claims being made, they always revert to the Legendary Chewbacca defense:

- Ewoks live on Endor
- Everyone knows Chewbacca is a Wookie
- Wookies are not from Endor
- Therefore, Creationism is Science

The more I hear abut these journals, the more I start to think that perhaps allowing Creationism into the curriculum could be a good thing -- it would actually offer the high school student a prime example of what an invalid theory actually is, and why.

Member (Idle past 2205 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004

Message 17 of 17 (456206)
02-16-2008 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by tesla
02-14-2008 9:08 PM

I agree
but by the introduction topic, it would appear that the journal will only do what i have done.

Talking complete and utter nonsense about science, at length and with no real understanding of what science is or how it's conducted?

Yes I agree, it will only be doing what you have done.

there is only one science. and only one God. and God in science does not make it a new science. it would mean God is recognized in science. and because God is true, science would have better direction based on the truth of existence.

Complete rot.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by tesla, posted 02-14-2008 9:08 PM tesla has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019